Speaker Identification

Speaker 1 - Announcer / Opening Voice
Identified from the opening show introduction and program branding.

Speaker 2 - Jim Benson / Host
Identified from the program title, opening monologue, transitions between video clips, and closing remarks directing listeners to The Jim Benson Show pages.

Speaker 3 - Dr. Steve Turley / Video Clip Speaker
Identified from the host's introduction of the first video presentation as a recent post from conservative political commentator Dr. Steve Turley.

Speaker 4 - Robert Gouveia / Video Clip Speaker
Identified from the host's introduction of the second video as a post from Robert Gouveia's Watching the Watchers podcast. Spelling is listed for verification because the raw transcript rendered the surname phonetically.

Speaker 5 - Matt Morse / Video Clip Speaker
Identified from the host's introduction of the third video as a recent posting from the Matt Morse TV channel.

Speaker 6 - Interviewer / Fox News Clip Voice
Identified as a questioner speaking to Lara Trump within the Matt Morse video clip. The specific interviewer is not identified in the transcript.

Speaker 7 - Lara Trump / Video Clip Speaker
Identified from the Matt Morse segment, which introduces her by name before the quoted clip.

Speaker 8 - Donald Trump / Video Clip Speaker
Identified from the Matt Morse segment, which introduces President Trump before the quoted video clip.

Speaker 1 - Announcer / Opening Voice:
Conservative? You bet. Controversial? Right again. It's time to squabble on The Jim Benson Show.

Speaker 2 - Jim Benson / Host:
Welcome to another edition of The Jim Benson Show: conservative news and commentary addressing the issues that concern you, here on the BBS Radio and Television Network.

Today, we're going to focus on U.S. domestic political news and commentary as these relate to our ongoing struggle to save and preserve America as we have known it, and to defeat the globalist, communist, totalitarian-worshiping group of bad actors that seek to overthrow our constitutional republic and turn us into a third-world socialist hellhole and slave state.

If that statement sounds apocalyptic, it should, because it reflects the true apocalypse we face if we allow ourselves to be dumbed down, duped, and controlled by the evil people around the world who, out of greed, ideological brainwashing, or other nefarious motivations, seek the utter destruction of Western civilization and, with it, our prosperity and precious individual freedoms.

Starting off with today's video presentations is a recent post from conservative political commentator Dr. Steve Turley on his YouTube channel, with his analysis and thoughts on last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a literal interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment's birthright citizenship clause, and also upholding the right of states to allow acceptance and counting of the infamous mail-in ballots long after Election Day. Thus, at least on the surface of this ruling, it gives the now communist-dominated Democratic Party a boost to its election-stealing apparatus.

Turley sees an eventual constitutional amendment as the ultimate solution here, but that is not going to be easily accomplished, obviously. The most rational immediate course of action is for more executive orders backed up with congressional legislation that remedies both the mail-in ballot fiasco and the birthright citizenship nightmare.

Birthright citizenship is being taken advantage of by people from around the world to gain entrance to and influence over the U.S., including hundreds of thousands from communist China, thus giving people from that country eventual political and potentially widespread influence in our elections here.

Speaker 3 - Dr. Steve Turley / Video Clip Speaker:
Hey, gang, it's me, Dr. Steve, coming to you from the beautiful Hudson Valley in upstate New York on a very much-needed vacation. As you know, we have been working really hard with international classical school movements throughout the world that are reawakening conservative Christian civilization. So now, you know, it is time for me to get a little rest and relaxation here.

But I just had to comment on the, frankly, one-two gut punch that we all just got from the supposedly conservative justices Roberts and Barrett on the Supreme Court. I am sure most of you have heard by now that, as of this morning, the court has indeed struck down President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship. That abysmal decision followed yesterday's blow to election integrity, where the same two justices joined the three liberal justices to allow mail-in ballots to be counted days after Election Day.

So let's take each in turn.

You might recall that President Trump, on January 20, 2025, his very first day back in office, directed federal agencies through an executive order not to recognize the citizenship of babies born in the United States if either parent was illegal. The administration's argument was very straightforward. The Fourteenth Amendment says citizenship belongs to persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

So it is those last six words. I mean, they are not decoration, right? Children born in the United States to parents who were not under the jurisdiction of this nation, such as an ambassador, a diplomat, or children of tribal Indians, are not recognized as United States citizens. Neither should the children of illegal migrants be recognized as citizens, because illegal migrants are, by definition, still under the jurisdiction of their own countries of origin.

But somehow, some way, the two supposed conservative justices, both nominated by Republican presidents, Roberts and Barrett, have embraced the insanity of the left that has infested modern jurisprudence. They have ruled that children born to illegals inside the country are indeed automatically U.S. citizens.

Even my namesake, Jonathan Turley, the law professor, who is not a conservative, says that this constitutional interpretation is utterly insane. His exact words were "perfectly insane." He thinks this is going to force us to try ultimately to pass a constitutional amendment that permanently defines the jurisdiction clause as excluding children of illegal migrants.

Now, the good news is that the border is shut because of the very policies that were instituted on that very day, January 20, 2025, the same day President Trump issued his executive order. Since that day, there have been zero illegal border crossings. Zero. That is not an exaggeration.

Keep in mind, the anchor-baby strategy tied to this birthright citizenship is officially dead. An illegal alien parent is absolutely still subject to deportation even if their child is a U.S. citizen. Courts have upheld that for 50 years. Having a U.S. citizen child is not the equivalent of getting a visa. A U.S. citizen child cannot petition for a parent's green card until the child turns 21.

So even setting deportation aside, the anchor does not legally attach. If the parent is deported before the child can petition for them when the child turns 21, the parents have two choices. They can leave the child here with U.S.-based relatives, or they can take the child with them. Technically speaking, the child is not being deported. The parent simply chooses to bring them in their deportation.

Under Trump's current enforcement posture, prosecutorial discretion, as it has been called, where ICE would previously deprioritize parents of citizen children like they did under the Biden administration, is dead. It is gone, and it will be gone for the next few years.

But all that said, this decision this morning, as well as the blow to election integrity yesterday, are two very painful reminders that Roberts and Barrett are not conservatives. They are not constitutional originalists like Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh has gotten much more originalist, actually, as time has gone on.

Roberts and Barrett are not originalists. They are institutionalists. That is a very important distinction to get. They are not originalists. They are institutionalists. They care more about the court's reputation than they do about fidelity to the Constitution. They care more about avoiding political controversy than deciding in favor of our constitutional republic.

So when you have the other justices in default cases running home to their judicial philosophy, either on the left or the right, Roberts and Barrett run home to stability. That is not textualism. That is judicial timidity dressed up in constitutional robes. That is exactly what we are going to have to fight against when a Republican president is set to nominate the next Supreme Court justice.

The smell test is no longer constitutional originalism. The smell test is whether they are institutionalists; whether they are going to allow their devotion to the court's reputation to overrule their supposed commitment to constitutional originalism. We saw the same thing yesterday with their blow to election integrity.

All of that forces us to ask: what do we do? What decisive actions can we take to finally resolve this judicial insanity? That is exactly what we are about to find out.

Yesterday, in a five-to-four decision, Justice Barrett, joined by Roberts and the three liberal justices, upheld a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received and counted up to five days later. Fourteen states, all blue states, have similar laws.

Barrett wrote that federal law specifies that a vote must be cast, but not when a ballot must be received. Therefore, states can set up their own receipt deadlines.

Now, Justice Alito, joined by Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, wrote a scorching dissent, pointing out that Election Day is a specified date, not a span of multiple days. The Election Day statutes require that federal elections occur on that date. But if the collection of ballots continues for days on end afterward, like it did in Mississippi here, then the election is not held until the end of that period.

So there was not an Election Day. There are de facto election days, which contradicts the statute designating a single day for the election. That is not spin. That is the plain reading of the statute. Federal law designates the first Tuesday of November as Election Day, not election week, not election month. Congress sets the date: one day.

Now this five-to-four decision allows states to shred that deadline by simply calling the extended counting period something other than the election. If it is California, you could literally be counting for months on end after the federally mandated date.

Roberts and Barrett are effectively saying that the federal government can set the date, but there is nothing that constitutionally mandates how state legislatures have to honor it. The irony here is beyond obvious, I guess, to them.

When it came to birthright citizenship, a question of executive power over immigration that the federal government gives to the president, they were willing to override the president by refusing to read the text as originally intended by the framers. But when it comes to election integrity and a clear federal statute, suddenly it is all about supposedly what the Constitution originally mandated, and it was never the actual hour.

So you cannot have it both ways. Either the court reads texts honestly and applies them, or it defers. Roberts and Barrett chose deferral when it inconveniences conservatives, and activism when it inconveniences the left. That is not judicial philosophy. That is a pattern.

They are institutionalists, and they see as their job the responsibility of supposedly balancing the court so that the right does not get too much of what it wants, and the left does not get too much of what it wants. So they are actively obstructing constitutional originalism, at least when it comes to decisions like this.

Bottom line, moving forward, we now know exactly what we need to prevent in the next Supreme Court appointments. We are slowly getting rid of the Senate RINOs, and the national trajectory is clearly moving in the conservative direction. So enough of these institutionalists across the board. We need faithful, unapologetic originalists. That is number one.

Secondly, the more red the country gets, the more red states accumulate, the easier it is going to be for us to pass constitutional amendments. In the end, that is really what we are going to have to do to push back against the court.

The left can talk about stacking them, packing the court, all they want. They are losing political geography. To ratify a constitutional amendment, 38 out of the 50 states have to approve it. That is three-fourths. You actually only need 34 states to hold an Article V constitutional convention that bypasses Congress in the proposal of constitutional amendments.

The simple fact is that Republicans are quickly controlling more and more state legislatures. We are getting very close. Right now, we are at 28 state legislatures that we are controlling, and it is only going to continue to grow with the voter-registration crisis that the Democrats are facing.

So we are just four or five states away from being able to actually call an Article V constitutional convention and rectify this nonsense. I think, in the end, what all of this means is that today's SCOTUS ruling on birthright citizenship is really actually a clarion call for the Article V movement.

If the court will not read the Constitution honestly, then we the people can rewrite the relevant clauses. Republicans are closer to having the state-level power to do that than at any other point in modern history.

In the meantime, yes, we have to push the Senate to pass the SAVE Act, which would require proof of citizenship. It would restrict mail-in ballots. It would do the job the court is telling the legislature to do. The court just told us they are not going to rewrite the statute. You have to do that. So we should say, fine, we will rewrite it in such a way that guarantees election integrity from this way forward.

Bottom line: the court failed the country. Bottom line. They put their own institutionalism in front of what is best for the nation and what is most faithful to the Constitution. So it is our job to keep going, to keep fighting, and yes, ultimately, we most certainly and inevitably will win.

Speaker 2 - Jim Benson / Host:
Continuing with our look at the Democrats' election-stealing machine, here is a recent post by Robert Gouveia from his Watching the Watchers podcast, in which he analyzes a leftist judge's striking down President Trump's recent executive order directing the U.S. Postal Service to ensure states follow federal election law by forcing them to only use mail-in ballots matching actual citizens on federal voter registration lists. The Trump administration is, of course, appealing this abominable ruling.

Speaker 4 - Robert Gouveia / Video Clip Speaker:
The Trump DOJ is now appealing the blocks on his election order. We know that previously an executive order came down out of the White House and said, we are going to fix our elections finally once and for all.

The executive branch has the authority to execute the laws. Those laws include proper operations of the U.S. Postal Service, and we can do things to uphold the integrity of our elections without stealing the elections from the operational control of the states.

The executive order that was handed down really had two main components to it. One was about creating citizenship lists. If the states will not do it, the federal government already knows who the citizens are and where they are because they have the IRS, the Social Security Administration, Homeland Security, and all these various agencies that already have this data.

All they wanted to do was collaborate among themselves to create master lists against which the states could check to validate that the people voting in our elections are actual citizens and legitimate voters.

Then we had part two, which was about the Postal Service and whether or not the Postal Service would be picking up mail ballots from people who were not on the list. The federal Postal Service is not governing elections, of course. They govern mail, and they are not obligated or required to commit fraud or to enable fraud that is being committed by the states.

They do not transport cocaine if some California resident sends it in the mail to another resident. They do not have to abide by that. So if a fraudulent ballot is being introduced, they do not have to pick it up. If you are not on the list, they do not have to pick it up. It is the federal government branch called the U.S. Postal Service. It is a federal agency.

We saw previously that this has been a one-two-three punch. Multiple different judges across the country have been coming in, and death by a thousand cuts, knifing this new order off at the knees.

One of them was called Sparkle Sooknanan. She is actually a dual citizen. She is from Trinidad and Tobago. Joe Biden appointed her. She was born in a foreign land and, as far as we know, still maintains her residency there. So we have a dual-citizen judge who comes in, I think she got naturalized in 2009, and is now taking over our elections to say you cannot actually validate citizenship at all because it is illegal.

She issued an order on this. This was the case of the League of Women Voters versus the Department of Homeland Security. She said, you cannot make the citizenship list. You cannot allow this to happen because this threatens a sacred right to vote, I guess, for the noncitizens and for the fraudsters.

Because if people are voting who should not be voting, that tramples on our sacred right to vote. Our vote counts for less, or it is canceled out by a fraudulent vote, or overwhelmed by fraudulent votes.

So she said, of course, that the court cannot stand idly by. Trump signed the executive order, and then a bunch of these leftist organizations sued. The League of Women Voters, which has bodies all over the country, is essentially, in my opinion, created to file election lawsuits, and they have done this for a long time.

So they sued under the APA. Originally, a lot of this was stalled out. Other judges said, you have no claim, you have no standing, you have not made the right showing that there is a problem. But she came in earlier this week and granted their request.

So the court vacates, for the entire country, the SAVE Modified program, which was a federal database that was actually implemented previously. But you cannot use this because this new capability that they are developing was created in excess of statutory authority and did not follow the proper procedure. She invalidated it across the country. She, of course, is from the District of Columbia and really from Trinidad and Tobago, and now says nobody can check or validate citizenship across the board.

That was one half that got taken out in D.C. The second half also got taken out by this other judge, an Obama judge who was appointed and took office back in 2014. Her name is Indira Talwani. She issued a 37-page ruling, and that also got dropped right here.

Once again, California, and it is interesting because they are not suing in California. They are suing in Massachusetts, doing a little bit of forum shopping. Missouri and the red states want this program. They say, we would actually like to check lists. We would actually like to validate our list against your list. That will make our job a lot better.

So red states came in to intervene, but they do not care about that. She dropped this one yesterday, and she said 23 states, the blue states and D.C., sued to stop the other half. You cannot now make changes to the Postal Service rules.

We saw the Postmaster General earlier this week say, if you are not on the list, we are not picking up your mail. The Democrat senators flipped out. So the blue states sued, and the red states joined in as defendants.

Here, in this 37-page opinion, she says you cannot do that. It is ultra vires. It is unconstitutional. It violates separation of powers and the election clauses. This is a Tenth Amendment problem, and now the Postal Service is also enjoined from making these changes.

A lot of the same arguments that we have seen before. She says, you are establishing infrastructure. You are not allowed to do that. These sections tell the Postmaster General to not pick up the mail. The rulemaking has been progressing. We have read the rules here.

She says you can also get charged with a crime for this because you are actually facilitating voter fraud under the Trump executive order. But now all of it is blown out.

So only the states can govern elections, even though the Postal Service is not replacing anything the state is governing. She goes through and gives us a lecture about Congress's role in federal elections. I always love hearing about the proper role of our governance by the judges who then usurp all of the power from the presidency. It is rich.

So the president's limited role in federal elections: the Constitution does not give him any power over elections. He is not taking it. He is just governing the mail.

If we can crack this nut, they are in big trouble because they are so panicky about this. They sue in every single location they possibly can. Every time you get even closer to getting the list, they all freak out. You cannot see it. You cannot look inside.

We have federal laws that say we can inspect those things. Federal laws say you have to maintain your list. People move. People die. We have multiple duplicate registrations. We have people who are noncitizens who are on the list. They do not maintain them. Judicial Watch is suing over that.

But every time a new lawsuit gets filed, the whole apparatus has an antibody response, and they come racing in to stop it from happening. Some people may not be included. The Democrats get all these declarations. They have a lawfare infrastructure that we could only dream of on our side.

All of these are declarations. This whole page: Barber declaration, Brutton declaration, Kansas, McClousky, Wise, and many others; Miller, Rosenberg. If you do this, I may not be allowed to vote. I am going to be disenfranchised.

Because a couple of people who cannot figure out how to vote are going to be disenfranchised, nobody gets election integrity at all. For them, really, it is an either-or. If you have any mechanisms in place to stop fraud, then that is going to disenfranchise somebody; therefore, you can have no mechanisms.

It is the strangest thing. There is fraud in everything. Literally everything. You can look up the numbers. There are errors and fraud at high levels in mortgages. There are estimates that about one percent of mortgage applications are fraudulent or have some fraud in them. Just ask Lisa Cook and Letitia James. Those are major crimes, felonies, to commit mortgage fraud, but it happens at a one percent level.

That is interesting because that is a pretty high rate. Just extend that and extrapolate that to elections. If you have one percent fraud in a million voters, that is 10,000 votes. That is dispositive in a place like Georgia or Arizona in 2020. I would suspect the fraud levels are much higher than that.

So you can find it everywhere you look. You can find it in financial transactions. You can find high amounts of fraud in every single entity in America except elections. There is zero percent fraud according to them, and the only thing that matters is enfranchisement.

So the court has previously dismissed other complaints on prudential ripeness grounds, but I am going to reverse myself. Accordingly, it is now ordered that the other sections are legally void. They violate separation of powers, which is so rich coming from a judge who is now doing exactly that.

No, you are violating separation of powers. I am not. I am a federal judge. I am upholding the Constitution. So she says you are enjoined. You cannot do any of these things. Everybody is prohibited, and all of them listed here, including the Postmaster General: no mail allowed.

She also ordered, within seven days, provide notice that your prior rules are all reversed, all canceled. So ordered by Indira Talwani, another activist judge who says, I am not going to allow you to actually govern your country so that foreigners and other problematic voters can continue to vote. It is ridiculous.

But as we saw, the DOJ is now appealing this. This one just hit the docket in the League of Women Voters case. This one is going and attacking the one that came from Sparkle Sooknanan from Tobago, who is a dual citizen. Maybe we will see dual loyalties, which is why she wants a bunch of open holes in the election system.

All defendants are now notified, writes the DOJ, courtesy of Steven Pezzi, saying that we are now appealing this to the District Court of Columbia, and we are going to continue to fight for the executive power to have fair and legitimate elections.

Speaker 2 - Jim Benson / Host:
Our last video today is from the Matt Morse TV channel on YouTube, with a recent posting by Morse discussing how the communists, despite the lie and trick of the "communism is dead" myth, have largely taken over the Democratic Party.

You will see Morse state that the late U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, who oversaw congressional hearings into communist influence in America during the Red Scare of the late 1940s and 1950s, was essentially right and correct in his observations about this situation.

What Morse does not relate here is that McCarthy was being secretly made privy to intelligence from the FBI, which had been surveilling communists and their supporters in Hollywood and elsewhere in American society. Overall, I find Morse does a good job of summarizing the situation with today's Democratic Party.

Speaker 5 - Matt Morse / Video Clip Speaker:
Ladies and gentlemen, all the way back in the 1950s, there was a Republican senator by the name of Joseph McCarthy. For a very long time, people called McCarthy a crazy conspiracy theorist. They called him a total nut job.

The reason why is because McCarthy was sounding the alarm against the communist infiltration of the United States of America. You see, what McCarthy said all the way back in the 1950s was this: he said the communists were infiltrating our schools, our elementary schools, our middle schools, our high schools, our universities. He said the communists were infiltrating our military. All of our great American institutions, he said, the communists were infiltrating.

But here is the thing. Even though some people called him a crazy nut-job conspiracy theorist back in the 1950s and 1960s, guess what? He was right. He was right about all of it. Now, in 2026, 70 years later, everyone with a functioning brain inside of their head knows he was right, including our great President Trump.

Now, as you might have heard, a couple of days ago over in New York, a series of Third World, anti-American communist political candidates, hate to say it, successfully made their way through the Democrat primaries. All of these candidates were endorsed by communist New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani.

This is really what brings us to today's massive news because President Trump, who is very aware of this communist threat, just went absolutely scorched earth. Ladies and gentlemen, take a look at this.

President Trump posted on Truth Social this morning, quote: "The communists are finally making their move. I have been waiting and preparing for this for a very long time." He says, "It is easy to be a communist. All you have to do is say, I will give you everything for free. But that means you are taking it away from others that have earned it. Over thousands of years, that ideology has not worked out once. The game is on. I hope you enjoy watching. President Donald J. Trump."

Wow. Now, folks, at this point, I would like to take a moment to explain why I mentioned Senator Joseph McCarthy a moment ago. You see, I was not just giving an unrelated lesson in American history. No, it is actually very related. It is very topical. It has everything to do with this.

In fact, I have something I want you to take a look at here. Ladies and gentlemen, here is a photo of a young Donald Trump pictured with his political mentor at the time, a very long time ago, a man named Roy Cohn.

Cohn rose to prominence after lobbying for the execution of the Rosenbergs, a husband-and-wife pair of communist spies. You might remember them. Cohn was on the prosecutorial team convicting others alongside the Rosenbergs before serving as the chief counsel for the iconic anti-communist Senator Joseph McCarthy.

Cohn's mentorship of a young Donald Trump is the main story of the biographical drama The Apprentice. The movie title focuses on Trump as Cohn's political apprentice, with Trump mentored under Cohn's fervent patriotism and anti-communism.

The movie was praised by Trump friend Roger Stone, also depicted in the film, as uncanny for its accuracy as everything unfolded back in the day. Stone, a Cohn associate and close Trump confidant, encouraged Trump to run for the presidency as a Republican, with Cohn's anti-communism and Republicanism leading to Trump's world-changing political rise.

So, folks, a young Donald Trump, perhaps in his early 30s, appears to have been heavily mentored and influenced by one of the most outspoken anti-communist individuals, Roy Cohn, who worked as chief counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy during the McCarthy era of anti-communism.

Now, President Trump's daughter-in-law actually chimed in this morning. Lara Trump is her name. But first, before we get to that, all this continues to get even more interesting and curious as we go on here, so bear with me.

Do me a favor. Make sure to hit that like button. Make sure to follow. Hit that like button, follow, subscribe. We are on Rumble, Spotify, Apple Podcasts. Go drop a five-star review. It helps all, of course. We are on YouTube here.

Ladies and gentlemen, take a listen to what Lara Trump had to say about all of this this morning.

Speaker 6 - Interviewer / Fox News Clip Voice:
Lara, good to see you tonight. The president said we are going to have to defeat communism again. A few years ago, the word socialism was something they ran away from. Now they are embracing it. Can communism be far away?

Speaker 7 - Lara Trump / Video Clip Speaker:
I do not think so. I mean, I think we all kind of laughed, Lara, not too long ago, at some of these really radical, crazy, country-ending ideas that we heard from these folks who have literally taken over the Democrat Party, these socialists. But look where we are. Look around New York City. Look out in Seattle. Look at all these primary candidates, a lot of them you just highlighted, who have really taken over the Democrat Party.

But look, this is what happens when you have a void at the top, right? There is no question who has been the leader of the Republican Party for about 11 years. It has been Donald Trump. When Joe Biden was elected president, though, this guy did not know where he was half the time. There was zero leadership. He was rudderless, and that left a space for these far-left radical socialists to literally take over and become the face of the party.

They tried to present themselves initially as, oh, we still like America. America is still okay. Now they are saying, Lara, we want to wipe our hands on the American flag. You are great at pointing out that it starts in our schools. This is why this president has taken education so seriously, because when you are teaching our next generation of Americans that this country is a bad place, that it is an unfair, racist place, when somebody comes in and they want to sell you the moon, sun, and stars and give you other people's money, you are going to latch on to that, and you might take a bite.

That is exactly where we are right now. So no, communism probably is not that far away. These people have been clear. They want to radically transform this country, and now they are not even hiding it anymore.

Speaker 5 - Matt Morse / Video Clip Speaker:
She is absolutely right. We saw a clip from none other than Stephen Miller yesterday afternoon. What did he say that pertains to all this? He said, listen, at this point in the Democrat Party, there are two types of people. There are people who are truly and genuinely evil and anti-American to their core. They are hell-bent on destroying this republic. That is category one of Democrats today.

Category two: cowards. Cowards who are sitting idly by and watching this happen. Cowards and anti-American traitors. That is the Democrat Party in 2026, Stephen Miller said yesterday.

Lara Trump says, listen, the reason why the Democrat Party has shifted and changed in this way, becoming more communist, really I might just say thoroughly communist, entirely communist at this point. I have seen enough. She says it is because of these cowards who have just sat there and let it happen.

The Democrat Party has been hijacked. This is not the Democrat Party of 1980 or 1970. That party is gone. It is not even the Democrat Party of 2000 or 2010. That party is gone. It is a communist party these days.

Now, President Trump actually, this morning, while speaking out at an event, took to the stage and chimed in on all of this in video form earlier this morning. Take a listen to this, really exposing how much of a threat this rise in communism is right now inside the Democrat Party. Take a listen.

Speaker 8 - Donald Trump / Video Clip Speaker:
As you saw with the communists elected in New York City recently, the communists, and they are not social Democrats, they want to completely destroy the traditional American way of life.

Communism is very easy to sell. It destroys everything, but it is very easy. I will be honest. I think I would be the greatest communist in history. I would give free rent. Ladies and gentlemen, from now on, you do not have to pay any rent. From now on, anybody who wants a house, do not worry about it. Just pick the house you want. Everybody gets free food. Everything is free from this point forward. Everyone is going to vote for me.

The problem is, after two or three years, the country is a disaster area. The country fails. They always do. It always does. It is so easy to sell. That first year, I would tell you I would be the most popular. It is happening right now in New York and California.

But you will start living in squalor. You will live in squalor. There will be no food. There will be no housing. There will be no military. There will be no law and order. There will be no nothing. There will be no nothing. You will be a third-world inhabitant in every way, and everyone will suffer or die. You will suffer or die.

This is what happens. For thousands of years, it has been happening by different names. Thousands of years. I would be, I am telling you, I would be the greatest communist in history. It would be so easy. You would not have to work. You could stay home. The problem is, a couple of years go by, the whole place collapses. It always does. It always has.

Speaker 5 - Matt Morse / Video Clip Speaker:
I will tell you something here, folks. For you who are aware, you know this. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, there was a group in Eastern Europe called the Bolsheviks. You have heard about them, the early Russian communists.

They had a term. The term they used was "useful idiot." They realized, wow, there are a lot of useful idiots who are easily manipulated. They are lied to. They are receptive to our communist propaganda. We are going to lie to them. We are going to deceive them. We are going to take advantage of these useful idiots. We are going to hijack control of the country. We are going to seize power. Then we will be free to implement our communist devices, at which point famine and plague and death and genocide follow shortly thereafter.

Every single time, as Trump says, every time it has been implemented or attempted, that is what happens without fail. Trump is totally right.

So what do they say? We are talking about useful idiots. They say, listen, I am a communist. If you vote for me, I promise everybody gets a free unicorn. You get a unicorn. You get a cupcake every single day. Free houses. Everybody gets a pony. There will be rainbows and sunshine every single day. If you vote for me, I am your communist.

Some people say, wow, really? I get a free unicorn? I get cupcakes every single day? There are going to be rainbows and sunshine every single day if I vote for you, the communist? Okay, I will do it. People do it, and it happens. It is happening right now in the Democrat Party. Seriously, they are being duped.

Speaker 2 - Jim Benson / Host:
Once again, Trump was right when he observed on the eve of the 2024 election that it reflected a struggle between communism and freedom.

We now know, indisputably from works such as the book Stolen Elections: The Takedown of Democracies Worldwide by Ralph Bazzulo, available on Amazon.com, that communists from Venezuela, Cuba, China, and their supporters in other countries have been colluding with their ideological brethren here in the U.S., or at least the evidence strongly indicates that, to rig and steal our elections using electronic voting equipment here and in more than 70 countries around the world, installing their leftist dupes and lackeys, such as Joe Biden, as heads of state.

When I say the evidence strongly suggests that, I am talking about bad actors in this country colluding with these people. It is indisputable that the Venezuelan National Election Commission, or at least according to the information I know, and I see a lot of it coming from Ralph Bazzulo's book, and also statements by someone mentioned, probably in that book, former CIA officer and investigator Gary Burdson, that commission in Venezuela had some 100 software engineers, otherwise electronic engineers, helping to manipulate electronic voting around the world in these elections.

There is much more to be done to eliminate this web of intrigue, illegality, and treason through corrupt elections around the world. But at least now we know more about where to look and what to do to combat it.

That is all for today's show. As always, we hope you found today's content of interest and value.

You can watch and/or listen to a podcast of today's show when it is posted shortly here on The Jim Benson Show pages at bbsradio.com forward slash The Jim Benson Show, and elsewhere on the internet, including x.com at JamesB50309197, and also on rumble.com and Apple Podcasts.

While you are at it, if you visit my pages here at bbsradio.com, scroll down on my index page at bbsradio.com forward slash The Jim Benson Show and check out our related video section.

Look for us again two weeks from today in this same time slot with another edition of the show. Have a great rest of your day and evening.